Project Governance and Performance

Governance models that drive project outcomes, scope governance structures and practices on built environment projects, performance strategy, metrics and progress measurement, and materials and logistics.

5 minutes 5 Questions

Within the PMI Construction Professional (PMI-CP) credential, Project Governance and Performance covers the structures, decision rights, and measurement practices that keep a built environment project aligned with organizational strategy, contractual obligations, and stakeholder expectations. Gover…

Concepts covered
Governance Models for Construction ProjectsDecision Rights and Steering CommitteesMaterials Management and Site LogisticsScope Governance StructuresGovernance Reporting and AssurancePerformance StrategyScope Governance and Gate ReviewsImplementing Governance to Drive OutcomesEarned Value and Site ProductivityMetrics and Progress Measurement
Test mode:
Start practice test

PMI-CP - Project Governance and Performance Example Questions

Test your knowledge of Project Governance and Performance

Question 1

A governance charter lets the project manager approve changes up to $75,000. It states that delegated limits may be passed to another person only by written designation from the sponsor. Before a three-week leave, the project manager emails the site deputy: "approve anything under $75,000 while I'm away." The contractor then submits a $40,000 change that the deputy has already priced and evaluated against the project outcomes. What should the deputy do?

Correct Answer: Seek a written interim designation from the sponsor before signing

The charter allows delegated limits to pass only by written designation from the sponsor, so the deputy must obtain that interim designation before signing, even though the change is within the dollar limit and has already been evaluated.
Treating the manager's email as delegation fails because the manager has no authority to sub-delegate. A written note from the wrong person is still invalid. Referring the change to the steering committee's next meeting needlessly escalates and delays a change the sponsor can authorize quickly. Approving now for later ratification means acting without authority, and the manager cannot ratify a delegation they were never allowed to make.
Key concept: delegation of authority must follow the governance charter's designated chain of approval.

Question 2

On a public-private partnership hospital, the project board (sponsor, lenders' technical advisor and design-build contractor) meets weekly through commissioning. It signs off each building system after an independent commissioning agent witnesses its tests. The facility operator's requirements were confirmed at design and have not changed, but the operator attends board meetings only as an observer. Several systems the board accepted are now being rejected by the operator at handover trials, reopening work and delaying occupancy. Which governance gap BEST explains the recurring rejections?

Correct Answer: Acceptance authority sits in a forum that omits the party who must accept and run the systems

The board signs off systems without the operator, the party who must ultimately accept and run them, so its acceptances do not carry the operator's judgment and are later overturned at handover trials.
The weekly cadence is not the problem, because the board meets often enough through commissioning. The contractor is not accepting its own defects, since an independent agent witnesses the tests and the board signs off jointly. The idea that acceptance criteria went stale does not fit, because the operator's requirements were confirmed at design and have not changed.
Key concept: governance decision rights and stakeholder inclusion, meaning acceptance authority must include the end user or operator.

Question 3

On a design-build office project, the scope governance plan states that owner review comments on design submittals are checked against the owner's project requirements. Any comment that goes beyond those requirements is logged for the change board. At the 60% design review, the owner's facility staff mark up upgraded finishes and add a second server room. The design-builder's project manager confirms that both items exceed the owner's project requirements. What should the project manager do NEXT?

Correct Answer: Record both markups in the change register as potential changes for the change board to evaluate

The governance plan already says what to do with comments that exceed the owner's project requirements. The project manager has confirmed both markups go beyond those requirements, so the next step is to log them in the change register for the change board to evaluate.
Incorporating the markups now and pricing them later starts out-of-scope work before it is approved. Getting cost acceptance from facility staff skips the change board, and those staff may not have authority to approve changes. Treating the markups as routine review comments ignores the confirmed scope deviation and invites scope creep.
Key concept: following the defined scope governance and change control process to prevent scope creep in design-build delivery.

More Project Governance and Performance questions
117 questions (total)
Practice 100 questions
One session at a time, always new questions